tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post3478263275330243131..comments2024-03-19T07:10:27.303-07:00Comments on Quark Soup by David Appell: NSIDC: "The Arctic sets yet another record low maximum winter extent"David Appellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-56213207763555493762016-03-30T09:13:48.764-07:002016-03-30T09:13:48.764-07:00David, I'm not sure where to stick this but pe...David, I'm not sure where to stick this but perhaps you and other science reporters need to get together and perform an intervention on Eric Holthaus. In what is not a bad article on coral bleaching he apparently was compelled to write this:<br /><br />"Coral bleaching and record-low Arctic sea ice are leading indicators that we’re rapidly leaving behind the stable climate we’ve enjoyed for the last few million years."<br /><br />Last few million years? Has he not heard about the ice ages? The point is that the climate has been relatively stable since the Holocene. That's not millions of years.<br />He's giving climate reporting a bad name.JoeThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06540568535579405609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-8229951325565610402016-03-29T20:40:26.069-07:002016-03-29T20:40:26.069-07:00"Somehow, this seems to be too strong. Resear..."Somehow, this seems to be too strong. Researchers on every side do look at data for periods shorter than 10 to 20 years"<br /><br />Only to shut-up deniers.<br /><br />10-20 years is too small of an interval to gauge climate change, because too many natural factors oscillate with a period of that or slightly larger, especially the PDO and AMO.<br /><br />Doing so is a study about the noise not the signal.<br /><br />Really, this should not be difficult to understand. David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-85346364664732861152016-03-29T20:38:05.275-07:002016-03-29T20:38:05.275-07:00"In that case, a 15-year long slowdown in war..."In that case, a 15-year long slowdown in warming doesn't significantly undermine the models. By the same token, a record high temperature and record low Arctic ice extent don't significantly support the models."<br /><br />You're wrong yet again, David. The record high temperatures and record low Arctic ice extent are based on at least 100 years of data. David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-59332979325767705042016-03-29T10:12:01.498-07:002016-03-29T10:12:01.498-07:00I'm unclear about the IPCC's special use o...I'm unclear about the IPCC's special use of the word "projection". David accurately quoted the IPCC as saying that all the modelers have are projections for the equilibrium state, after all forcing and feedbacks have played out -- which takes centuries, at least. Trying to interpret their results after 10 or 20 years is meaningless, because these models were never built to make such predictions.<br /><br />In that case, a 15-year long slowdown in warming doesn't significantly undermine the models. By the same token, a record high temperature and record low Arctic ice extent don't significantly support the models. So, within any decadal time span we can only take the models on faith (or not) because there can't be enough data to accept or reject the models.<br /><br />Somehow, this seems to be too strong. Researchers on every side do look at data for periods shorter than 10 to 20 years. E.g., the latest IPCC report brought the bottom of the likely range for sensitivity down and also eliminated a best estimate of sensitivity, because of what the most recent data showed. <br /><br />CheersDavid in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.com